How a Twitter Mob Nearly Ruined My Life

Warren Buffet once said that all it takes is five minutes to ruin a reputation. For Des Hague, it only took forty-two seconds.

In 2014, Hague’s life was a bona fide rags-to-riches success story. After nearly twenty years of steadily climbing the corporate ladder, he had risen from living in the back of a fish-and-chips shop to becoming the CEO of one of the top hospitality providers in the world.

But when a video surfaced on Twitter of him kicking a dog in an elevator, everything changed. A mob formed on social media that spread like wildfire. Despite expressing deep regret for his actions, he was forced to resign from his job, and his family was threatened.

What the mob didn’t know was that the person depicted in the short video clip was the exact opposite of who Hague really was—a man who had survived a childhood of physical and sexual abuse, spent decades building a loving family and a high-flying career, and raised millions to fight child homelessness. Though ultimately there was little harm to the dog, his life was nearly destroyed in a few short days by thousands of people he had never met.

In Fifteen Minutes of Shame, Hague tells the inspiring story of how he overcame the odds to find improbable success and not only reveals the person behind the forty-two-second clip but makes a compelling argument against the dangers of embracing cancel culture.

Also for those interested in the truth the accurate court-sanctioned version of events from Judge Howard’s 2015 Reasons for Sentencing (rather than the highly sensationalized 2014 media narrative) is laid out below.

MEDIA CLAIMS VS. JUDGE HOWARD’S

ACTUAL FINDINGS

1. Pattern of Abuse

Media: Alleged repeated or ongoing abuse.

Judge: No evidence of any pattern—an isolated incident.

2. Severity of Harm

Media: Claimed severe injury and lasting trauma.

Judge: No lasting injury; veterinarian confirmed dog was healthy.

3. Nature of Incident

Media: Described as brutal, sadistic, prolonged torture.

Judge: Brief emotional lapse; not prolonged or sadistic.

4. Character Assessment

Media: Painted as inherently cruel.

Judge: No prior record; behavior inconsistent with character.

5. Remorse & Accountability

Media: Claimed apology was fake.

Judge: Early guilty plea; genuine remorse; proactive corrective steps.

6. Consequences Already Suffered

Media: Claimed he faced no consequences.

Judge: Significant collateral consequences—job loss, global humiliation, reputational damage.

7. Sentencing Fairness

Media: Suggested leniency.

Judge: Sentence proportionate; maximum fine; standard 3-year ban.

Conclusion:

Media narrative was exaggerated and inaccurate.

Judge Howard’s ruling reflects a factual, proportionate, and evidence-based assessment. The sensationalized reporting at the time clearly exaggerated the facts of this incident.